Tag: Ukraine

  • U.S. tells Ukraine it won’t send long-range missiles because it has few to spare

    U.S. tells Ukraine it won’t send long-range missiles because it has few to spare

    [ad_1]

    The Pentagon’s assessment of its stockpiles is informed in part by how many weapons and munitions planners think they might need to confront an enemy. Those plans have not been significantly revised since the start of the war in Ukraine, and have not recalibrated what the stockpiles the U.S. might need in reserve to face a weakened Russia, or account for the fact that Ukraine is essentially fighting that war right now.

    One of the reasons the military is hesitant to send the ATACMS is due to a desire to maintain a certain level of munitions in U.S. stockpiles, said one U.S. official, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military calculations.

    “With any package, we always consider our readiness and our own stocks while providing Ukraine what it needs on the battlefield,” said a senior DoD official. “There are other ways of providing Ukraine with the capabilities it needs to strike the targets.”

    Laura Cooper, the Pentagon’s top policy official for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia issues, said in a recent interview that “with every single capability that we provide, whether you’re talking, you know, HIMARS or you’re talking a particular kind of missile or ammunition, we’re always looking at the availability of our stocks, we’re looking at production considerations, and so that’s true of every capability, and we make decisions accordingly.”

    Lockheed Martin has produced about 4,000 ATACMS in various configurations over the past two decades. Some of those missiles have been sold to allied nations, which bought the missile for their own multiple rocket launcher systems. Around 600 were fired by U.S. forces in combat during the Persian Gulf War and the Iraq War.

    One workaround being considered by Kyiv is to ask for Washington’s approval to buy ATACMS from an allied country that operates the weapon, using military financing from the United States, according to one of the people familiar with the discussions. The list of ATACMS users includes South Korea, Poland, Romania, Greece, Turkey, Qatar and Bahrain.

    The other issue over sending ATACMS — that it’s too aggressive a move by Biden’s team — remains. But Ukrainian officials have heard such arguments about other weapons before, only for the Biden administration to reverse course and send artillery, missile defenses and tanks.

    Despite Washington’s reservations, Ukraine continues to push for more advanced weapons, with ATACMS typically at the top of the list.

    “Ukraine needs long-range missiles,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in a January video address to the Ukrainian people, “to deprive the occupier of the opportunity to place its missile launchers somewhere far from the front line and destroy Ukrainian cities.”

    On Tuesday, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Mark Milley will be in Brussels to host the ninth meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a monthly gathering of 50 nations that will discuss what new military support they can provide Ukraine. Kyiv is planning a spring and summer offensive to counter Russia’s assaults in the Donbas and Moscow’s drone and missile campaign against civilian targets.

    One person close to the Ukrainian government said that Kyiv doesn’t anticipate any new weapons in the assistance package Austin will announce this week. The drawdowns from existing stocks and contracts for new weapons won’t include ATACMS or F-16 warplanes, but will focus on ammunition, munitions, air defense and spare parts.

    Whatever the U.S. package — and other pledges by partner nations — Ukraine is looking for more secrecy when those governments announce that assistance.

    Officials in Kyiv are growing concerned that some of the more detailed lists coming out of Washington and elsewhere could risk providing too much information to their Russian foes, who can prepare defenses or countermeasures if they know what they’ll be facing, according to one of the people.

    Zelenskyy alluded to those growing concerns on Thursday in Brussels when he met with European Union leaders to talk about what he needs this year and beyond.

    Fresh off a successful trip to London where he met with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who pledged to help train Ukrainian pilots to fly NATO fighter jets, Zelenskyy said “we have moved towards the solutions concerning the long-range missiles and the training of our pilots… Also there are certain agreements which are not public but are positive. When these items will happen, our state will know this, but I don’t want to prepare the Russian Federation.”

    The U.S. and allies have long maintained some element of mystery over some capabilities sent to Ukraine, cloaking some military aid under vague catchall categories such as rocket artillery or drones that could mean any number of things.

    But the U.S. has also done more than most countries to announce the amount and nature of its donations and defense contracts proposed with Ukraine, as the Biden administration tries to show its commitment to Kyiv.

    Others, such as Finland, Sweden, Spain and Canada, are more vague, and generally decline to list most of the specific equipment, weapons and munitions they provide.

    The desire for more secrecy can be seen as a difficult request for some countries that are eager to show how deep their support for Ukraine goes, especially when that support can also mean American military financing to replace stocks in later years. At Thursday’s EU summit, Zelenskyy formally asked Slovakian Prime Minister Eduard Heger to transfer some of his country’s MiG-29 fighter planes to Ukraine.

    On Friday, Heger said he was ready to start talks on the potential transfer. “The Ukrainian president asked me to deliver the MiGs. Now, because this official request has come, the process of negotiations can be started,” Heger said.

    [ad_2]
    #U.S #tells #Ukraine #wont #send #longrange #missiles #spare
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Russian casualties highest since first week of Ukraine war

    Russian casualties highest since first week of Ukraine war

    [ad_1]

    London: Russian soldiers are dying in “greater numbers in Ukraine this month than at any time” since the first week of the invasion, according to Ukrainian data.

    The Ukrainian data shows 824 Russian soldiers dying per day in February.

    The figures were highlighted by the UK’s Ministry of Defence (MoD). The figures cannot be verified – but the UK says the trends are “likely accurate”, BBC reported.

    The increase comes amid talk of a spring offensive by Russian forces in the east of the country.

    Last week, Ukraine’s outgoing defence minister, Oleksiy Reznikov, said they were anticipating a new Russian offensive around 24 February – the anniversary of the full-scale invasion.

    But some local politicians, including the governors of Luhansk and Donetsk, claimed the offensive had already begun, the media outlet reported.

    Some of the fiercest fighting has been around Bakhmut in the east of the country.

    On Sunday, the head of Russia’s Wagner mercenary force said the group had seized a settlement near the devastated city.

    Yevgeny Prigozhin said on Telegram: “Today, the settlement of Krasna Hora was taken by assault detachments of the Wagner PMC.”

    Prigozhin also gave his group credit for the offensive on Bakhmut, downplaying the Russian army’s role: “Within a radius of 50 km, plus or minus, there are only Wagner PMC fighters,” he wrote.

    According to the Ukrainian data, highlighted by the UK, 824 Russian losses a day is more than four times the rate reported in June and July, when around 172 Russian soldiers died each day.

    The Ukrainian military claims 137, 780 Russian military deaths since the full-scale invasion began.

    The UK’s MoD pointed out the recent increase could be due to “a range of factors, including lack of trained personnel, coordination, and resources across the front”.

    Ukraine “also continues to suffer a high attrition rate”, the UK’s MoD was quoted as saying by the media outlet.

    [ad_2]
    #Russian #casualties #highest #week #Ukraine #war

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Russian anti-war journalist reappears in Paris after fleeing house arrest in Russia – video

    [ad_1]

    Marina Ovsyannikova, the former Russian state TV editor who famously interrupted a live news broadcast to protest against the start of the Ukraine war, has described her escape from house arrest in Moscow and how she fled across Europe to seek asylum in France. ‘We went in so many different directions I don’t even know what direction we took, we changed to seven different vehicles,’ Ovsyannikova said at a Paris press conference with the journalists’ organisation Reporters without Borders

    [ad_2]
    #Russian #antiwar #journalist #reappears #Paris #fleeing #house #arrest #Russia #video
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Opinion | Republicans Can’t Succumb to Fantasy on Ukraine

    Opinion | Republicans Can’t Succumb to Fantasy on Ukraine

    [ad_1]

    russia ukraine war eu 22476

    So, by all means, let’s hope for a deal. The secret to unlocking a potential agreement, though, isn’t leaving Ukraine in the lurch and hoping that Vladimir Putin — just as he begins to make gains — decides from the goodness of his heart to prudently and modestly stand down because dominating Ukraine wasn’t so important to him after all.

    That’s obviously a fantasy. The only way there will eventually be a (flawed, unsatisfactory, and probably temporary) bargain is if Putin realizes that he has no hope of getting what he wants out of the war. With a major Russian offensive likely looming, we are still far from this point. The only way to get closer is for the Ukrainians to succeed on the battlefield, not retreat in the face of a reconstituted Russian assault.

    Ukraine doesn’t have an inherent right to our support, and we shouldn’t fool ourselves about our ability to vindicate principles or abstractions in Ukraine (democracy, the so-called rules-based world order, etc.).

    We should back Ukraine based on a cold-eyed calculation of our interest — we should want to stop Russia before it is tempted to bully or grab part of a NATO country in a vastly more dangerous adventure; to see Russia’s malign influence in Europe diminish rather than grow; to send a signal to China that the West will cohere and push back against territorial aggrandizement; and to resist the efforts of the de facto Russia-Chinese-Iranian alliance to undermine Western power.

    All that said, Ukraine is not the aggressor in this war; it is a victim of an unprovoked, calculated act of brutal aggression.

    Putin could quit fighting tomorrow, and Ukrainians would be content to reestablish their sovereign borders.

    Ukrainians could quit fighting tomorrow, and Putin would, in keeping with his original plan, topple the government and install a puppet regime — in effect, snuffing out Ukraine’s sovereign existence.

    There are a number of objections and arguments that populist and realist opponents make of current levels of aid to Ukraine.

    We’ve ended up in a proxy war with Russia. True enough. Yet, this is not the situation we sought out. It’s not as though we encouraged Latvia to invade Russia, and then began lavishly supplying and training its forces. Despite our warnings and attempts to head them off, the Russians invaded. We could have stayed out of it, and let the Kremlin work its will in Ukraine before moving on to its next target. Otherwise, we were inevitably going to be involved in a proxy war.

    The advantage of this proxy war is that the Russians are direct participants, and paying a heavy price, while our role is limited and indirect. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t risks to be managed, but we are in the role comparable to the Russians during the Vietnam War or the U.S. during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan — supporting a highly motivated indigenous force that is doing all the fighting against a bitter geopolitical adversary. This should be thought of as a favorable position, rather than one that makes us eager to wash our hands of the matter.

    The war is expensive and drawing down our stocks of weapons. This, too, is true. By any measure, the roughly $30 billion, and counting, that we’ve spent on Ukraine is real money. But it’s a little more than a third of what President Joe Biden is spending on new IRS enforcement, and about a fifth of unspent funds from federal pandemic relief. It is a fraction of a fraction of the defense budget.

    The drawdown of weapons has created shortages in U.S. stocks, but this is more exposing a vulnerability than creating one. If we are strained merely arming Ukraine, we’d quickly reach a breaking point in a direct conflict with China. The answer isn’t stinting on support to Ukraine, but rather building up our defense industrial base in a way that’d be necessary one way or the other.

    NATO expansion provoked the Russians. Even if this were true, it doesn’t change the current calculus — the West would still be faced with the choice of letting Russia make Ukraine a vassal or helping the Ukrainians resist. And the underlying contention is dubious.

    Everyone knew that Ukraine wasn’t going to actually join NATO anytime soon (or probably ever), and Russia didn’t rationally have anything to fear from the alliance — by the time Russia invaded Ukraine the first time in 2014, the U.S. had brought home all its tanks from Germany. Putin has made it clear that his ideological and geopolitical goal is to re-establish a version of the Russian empire. This is a deeply-held ambition that would very likely be the same if NATO had never expanded and if all the Baltic and Eastern and Central European states were blandly neutral and entirely disarmed — in fact, such a state of affairs would probably make Putin even more determined to realize his vision, because it would be so much easier.

    Putin is only pursuing a traditional Russian foreign policy. Well, yes. But just because Russia occupied Poland for a hundred years or so, or gobbled up various nations of Europe during World War II and made them satellite states, doesn’t mean similar projects today would have any legitimacy. It is certainly the case that Russia has always been concerned with securing and maintaining access to the Black Sea. It should be noted, however, that it already had an agreement from Ukraine dating to the late 1990s to base its Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol. For good measure, in 2014, Russia grabbed all of Crimea. Invading Ukraine and trying to take Kyiv is over-saucing the goose and isn’t about the Black Sea, but destroying a model of (imperfect) democracy on its border.

    If the case for throwing Ukraine overboard and accommodating the Russians is weak, the argument for a deal — as noted above — is quite strong. It’s not going to happen, though, if Putin can still sniff success. Although Biden has been stalwart in supporting the Ukrainians, he’s established a pattern of delay in giving them necessary weapons, before eventually relenting. We may regret not giving them even more material more quickly in the first year, when they had the opportunity to push the Russians even further back. Now, it’s not clear that they can do any better than maintain a stalemate, but they will need more long-range artillery capabilities, air defenses and drones to continue to hold their own.

    Cutting them off in the hopes of jump-starting negotiations would be folly and only benefit Putin who, if he has his druthers, would bring a bloody-minded peace of repression and devastation to Ukraine.

    [ad_2]
    #Opinion #Republicans #Succumb #Fantasy #Ukraine
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Inside Putin’s Russia, divided over his war: a soldier, artist and actor speak out – video

    [ad_1]

    The Guardian speaks to three St Petersburg residents: a soldier, a street artist and an actor, all with very different views on Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine which is nearing its first anniversary.

    Maxim, who has just come back from the frontline, thinks a Putin victory is in clear sight. ‘MV Picture’ shows her doubt towards the war through her art while Andrey, an actor, isn’t quite sure where his loyalties should lie

    [ad_2]
    #Putins #Russia #divided #war #soldier #artist #actor #speak #video
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • The secret Saudi plan to buy the World Cup

    The secret Saudi plan to buy the World Cup

    [ad_1]

    Saudi Arabia offered to pay for new sports stadiums in Greece and Egypt if they agreed to team up with the oil-rich Gulf heavyweight in a joint bid to host the 2030 football World Cup, POLITICO can reveal. 

    In exchange, the Saudis would get to stage three-quarters of all the matches, under the proposed deal. 

    The dramatic offer — likely worth billions of euros in construction costs — was discussed in a private conversation between Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, in summer 2022, according to a senior official familiar with the matter.

    A second senior official with knowledge of private discussions on the bid told POLITICO that Saudi Arabia is prepared to “fully underwrite the costs” of hosting for Greece and Egypt, but 75 percent of the huge 48-team tournament itself would be held in the Gulf state. 

    It is not clear whether the offer was taken up. But the three countries are now working on a joint proposal to host the 2030 tournament, a move which has triggered a backlash against Greece. 

    Riyadh’s megabucks offer to Greece, reported here for the first time, will fuel criticism that Saudi Arabia is effectively attempting to use its astronomical wealth to buy the World Cup by creating a trans-continental coalition to cleverly take advantage of the voting system. 

    In an attempt to persuade the members of football’s world governing body, FIFA, of the virtues of the Saudi-led bid, the proposed tournament would see matches held across three continents, providing geographical balance. A Middle East-only World Cup bid would be unlikely to succeed just eight years after Qatar hosted the tournament in 2022. 

    The Saudis’ main rivals are a joint Spain, Portugal and Ukraine bid from Europe, and a South American bid from Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and Chile.  

    The decision on who hosts the 2030 World Cup comes down to a public vote of the entire FIFA Congress, made up of more than 200 member associations from around the globe. If African countries, attracted by Egypt’s presence and Saudi investment around Africa, rally behind the bid, and Asian nations do the same, while Greece siphons off some European votes, the Saudi-led proposal will stand a strong chance of winning. 

    POLITICO approached all three governments for comment. The Greek and Saudi governments declined to comment and the Egyptian government did not respond to POLITICO’s requests. FIFA also declined to comment. 

    ‘New world order’

    Holding the World Cup would be the culmination of Saudi Arabia’s ambitious strategy to dominate major sporting events. Successes include winning the rights to host world championship boxing bouts, European football and Formula One motor races, while creating its own rebel golf tour. Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund also bought a prominent English football club and the country will host football’s Asian Cup for the first time in 2027. 

    But Saudi Arabia’s desire to stage the World Cup goes beyond reasons of sporting prestige, according to one regional expert.

    GettyImages 1450122766
    Lionel Messi of Argentina lifts the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 Winner’s Trophy after the team’s victory during the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 | Julian Finney/Getty Images

    “Saudi Arabia is strategically trying to position itself as an AfroEurasian hub — the center of a new world order,” Simon Chadwick, professor of sport and geopolitical economy at Skema Business School in Paris, said of the Saudi-fronted bid. “This positioning would enable Saudi Arabia to exert significant power and influence across a vast geographic area, which it is seeking to achieve by building relationships with key partners.”

    “The multipolar staging of a World Cup with Egypt and Greece would be neither altruism nor largesse. Rather, it would form part of a wider plan, which the government in Riyadh is enabling through the potential gifting of stadiums,” he added.

    The Saudi move to host the tournament has sparked disgust among human rights watchdogs, who point out the country’s brutal treatment of the LGBTQ+ community and migrant workers.

    “Saudi Arabian repression should not be rewarded with a World Cup,” said Minky Worden, director of global initiatives at Human Rights Watch. “So long as Saudi Arabia discriminates against LGBT people and punishes women for human rights activism, and does not have protections for the migrant laborers who would build the majority of the new stadiums and facilities, the country cannot meet the human rights requirements that FIFA already has in place.”

    The 2022 Qatar World Cup was blighted by criticism of the Gulf state over its treatment of migrant workers.

    Bad memories

    In Greece, paying for sports infrastructure is a touchy subject, where it is seen as a monument to government profligacy. 

    Back in 2004, Athens hosted the Olympic Games, with Greece splurging around €9 billion. However, much of the infrastructure was left abandoned after the Olympic flame went out. 

    As the country entered a decade-long depression and had to resort to bailout programs to avoid bankruptcy, the Olympics became a source of anger for Greeks who questioned whether the Games pushed their country further into recession. Nearly two decades after the Olympics extravaganza, many of the 30 venues remain unused, while some have been demolished.

    Since coming to power in 2019, Greece’s conservative New Democracy government has sought to deepen ties with the Saudis and other Gulf countries, as a response to arch-rival Turkey’s expansionist policy in the region.

    Mitsotakis has visited Riyadh multiple times, Greece has delivered military equipment and soldiers to Saudi Arabia and, in July last year, Athens became the first EU capital visited by bin Salman since he personally approved, according to declassified U.S. intelligence, the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

    Bin Salman, who is back in the West’s good books thanks to an energy crisis triggered by Russia’s war on Ukraine, signed a number of bilateral agreements in Athens last summer, while pledging to make Greece an energy hub for the distribution of “green hydrogen.”

    Saudi Arabia has traditionally enjoyed close diplomatic ties with Egypt. Bin Salman met Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in Cairo last June where he signed billions of euros worth of investment deals and discussed “bilateral, regional cooperation.”

    The decision on World Cup 2030 hosting will be made in 2024, with the bidding process set to open officially later this year. 

    Nektaria Stamouli and Nicolas Camut contributed reporting.



    [ad_2]
    #secret #Saudi #plan #buy #World #Cup
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Rishi Sunak is haunted by ghosts of prime ministers past

    Rishi Sunak is haunted by ghosts of prime ministers past

    [ad_1]

    britain politics 23013

    LONDON — “Back to her old self again” was how one erstwhile colleague described Liz Truss, who made her return to the U.K.’s front pages at the weekend. 

    That’s exactly what Rishi Sunak and his allies were afraid of. 

    Truss, who spent 49 turbulent days in No. 10 Downing Street last year, is back. After a respectful period of 13 weeks’ silence, the U.K.’s shortest-serving prime minister exploded back onto the scene with a 4,000-word essay in the Sunday Telegraph complaining that her radical economic agenda was never given a “realistic chance.”

    In her first interview since stepping down, broadcast Monday evening, she expanded on this, saying she encountered “system resistance” to her plans as PM and did not get “the level of political support required” to change prevailing attitudes.

    While the reception for Truss’s relaunch has not been exactly rapturous — with much of the grumbling coming from within her own party — it still presents a genuine headache for her successor, Sunak, who must now deal with not one but two unruly former prime ministers jostling from the sidelines. 

    Boris Johnson is also out of a job, but is never far from the headlines. Recent engagements with the U.S. media and high-profile excursions to Kyiv have ensured his strident views on the situation in Ukraine remain well-aired, even as he racks up hundreds of thousands in fees from private speaking engagements around the world.

    Wasting no time

    Truss and Johnson have, typically, both opted for swifter and more vocal returns to frontline politics than many of their forerunners in the role. 

    “Most post-war prime ministers have been relatively lucky with their predecessors,” says Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary, University of London. “They have tended to follow the lead of [interwar Conservative PM] Stanley Baldwin, who in 1937 promised: ‘Once I leave, I leave. I am not going to speak to the man on the bridge, and I am not going to spit on the deck.’”

    Such an approach has never been universal. Ted Heath, PM from 1970-74, made no secret of his disdain for his successor as Tory leader Margaret Thatcher. Thatcher in turn “behaved appallingly” — in Bale’s words — to John Major, who replaced her in Downing Street in 1990 after she was forced from office.

    But more recent Tory PMs have kept a respectful distance.

    David Cameron quit parliament entirely after losing the EU referendum in 2016, and waited three years before publishing a memoir — reportedly in order to avoid “rocking the boat” during the ongoing Brexit negotiations. 

    And while Theresa May became an occasional liberal-centrist thorn in Boris Johnson’s side, she did so only after a series of careful, low-profile contributions in the House of Commons on subjects close to her heart, such as domestic abuse and rail services in her hometown of Maidenhead.

    “You might expect to see former prime ministers be a tad more circumspect in the way they re-enter the political debate,” says Paul Harrison, former press secretary to May. “But then she [Truss] wasn’t a conventional prime minister in any sense of the word, so perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that she’s done something very unconventional.”

    Truss’s rapid refresh has not met with rave reviews.

    Paul Goodman, editor of influential grassroots website ConservativeHome, writes that “rather than concede, move on, and focus on the future, she denies, digs in and reimagines the past,” while Tory MP Richard Graham told Times Radio that Truss’ time in office “was a period that [people] would rather not really remember too clearly.”

    One long-serving Conservative MP said “she only had herself to blame for her demise, and we are still clearing up some of the mess.” Another appraised her latest intervention simply with an exploding-head emoji.

    Trussites forever

    But despite Tory appeals for calm, the refusal of Truss and Johnson to lie low remains a serious worry for the man eventually chosen to lead the party after Truss crashed and burned and Johnson thought better of trying to stage a comeback.

    Between them, the two ex-PMs have the ability to highlight two of Sunak’s big weaknesses. 

    While Truss may never live down the disastrous “mini-budget” of last September which sent the U.K. economy off the rails, her wider policy agenda still has a hold over a number of Conservative MPs who believe they have no hope of winning the election without it. 

    This was the rationale behind the formation last month of the Conservative Growth Group, a caucus of MPs who will carry the torch for the low-tax, deregulatory approach to government favored by Truss and who continue to complain Sunak has little imagination when it comes to supply-side reforms. 

    Simon Clarke, who was a Cabinet minister under Truss, insisted “she has thought long and hard” about why her approach failed and “posed important questions” about how the U.K. models economic growth in her Telegraph piece.

    Other Conservatives have been advocating a reappraisal of the actions of the Bank of England in the period surrounding the mini-budget, arguing that Truss was unfairly blamed for a collapse in the bond market.

    But Harrison doubts whether she may be the best advocate for the causes she represents. “There’s a question about whether it actually best serves her interests in pushing back against a strong prevailing understanding of what happened so soon after leaving office.”

    Johnson, meanwhile — to his fans, at least — continues to symbolize the star quality and ballot box appeal which they fear Sunak lacks. 

    One government aide who has worked with both men said Johnson’s strength lay in his “undeniable charisma” and persuasive power, while Sunak, more prosaically, “was all about hard work.”

    These apparent deficiencies feed into a fear among Sunak’s MPs that he is governing too tentatively and, as one ally put it recently, needs to rip off the “cashmere jumper.”

    It’s been posited that British prime ministers swing back and forth between “jocks” and “nerds” — and nothing is more likely to underline Sunak’s nerdiness than a pair of recently-deposed jocks refusing to shut up. 

    Trouble ahead 

    Unluckily for Sunak, there are at least three big-ticket items coming up which will provide ample ground on which his nemeses can cause trouble. 

    One is the forthcoming budget — the government’s annual public spending plan, due March 15. Truss and Johnson are unlikely to get personally involved, but Truss loyalists will make a nuisance of themselves if Sunak’s approach is judged to offer the paucity of answers on growth they already fear.

    Before that, Truss is expected to make her first public appearance outside the U.K. with a speech on Taiwan which could turn up the heat on Sunak over his approach to relations with China. 

    One person close to her confirmed China would be “a big thing” for her, and is expected to be a theme of her future parliamentary interventions.

    Then there is the small matter of the Northern Ireland protocol, the thorniest unresolved aspect of the Brexit deal with Brussels where tortured negotiations appear to be reaching an endgame.

    Sunak has been sitting with a draft version of a technical deal since last week, according to several people with knowledge of the matter, and is now girding his loins for the unenviable task of trying to get a compromise agreement past both his own party and hardline Northern Irish unionists.

    A Whitehall official working on the protocol said Johnson “absolutely” had the power to detonate that process, and that “he should never be underestimated as an agent of chaos.”

    One option touted by onlookers is for Sunak to attempt to assemble the former prime ministers and ask them to stand behind him on a matter of such huge national and international significance. But as things stand such a get-together is difficult to picture.

    At the heart of Johnson and Truss’ actions seems to be an essential disquiet over the explosive manner of their departures.

    They appear fated to follow in Thatcher’s footsteps, as Bale puts it — “not caring how much trouble they cause Sunak, because in their view, he should never have taken over from them in the first place.”



    [ad_2]
    #Rishi #Sunak #haunted #ghosts #prime #ministers
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • UK to train Ukrainian pilots as ‘first step’ toward sending fighter jets

    UK to train Ukrainian pilots as ‘first step’ toward sending fighter jets

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    WAREHAM, Dorset — Ukrainian fighter pilots will soon be trained in Britain — but Kyiv will have to wait a little longer for the modern combat jets it craves.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy left the U.K. Wednesday with a firm British commitment to train fighter jet pilots on NATO-standard aircraft, along with an offer of longer-range missiles.

    U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace has now been tasked with investigating which jets the U.K. might be able to supply to Ukraine, Downing Street announced — but Prime Minister Rishi Sunak fell short of making actual promises on their supply, which his spokesman said would only ever be a “long-term” option.

    Speaking at a joint press conference at the Lulworth military camp in Wareham, southern England, Sunak said the priority must be to “arm Ukraine in the short-term” to ensure the country is not vulnerable to a fresh wave of Russian attacks this spring.

    Standing alongside Zelenskyy in front of a British-made Challenger 2 tank, Sunak restated that “nothing is off the table” when it comes to provision of military assistance to Ukraine, and said fourth-generation fighter jets were part of his conversation with the Ukrainian president “today, and have been previously.”

    These talks also covered the supply chains required to support such sophisticated aircraft, Sunak said.

    But he cautioned a decision to deliver jets would only be taken in coalition with allies, and said training pilots must come first and could take “some time.”

    “That’s why we have announced today that we will be training Ukrainian air force on NATO-standard platforms, because the first step in being able to provide advanced aircrafts is to have soldiers or aviators who are capable of using them,” Sunak said. “We need to make sure they are able to operate the aircraft they might eventually be using.”

    The first Challenger 2 tanks pledged by Britain will arrive in Ukraine by next month, Sunak added.

    GettyImages 1246887970
    President Zelenskyy ramped up the pressure on Rishi Sunak joking that he had left parliament two years earlier grateful for “delicious English tea”, but this time he would be “thanking all of you in advance for powerful English planes” | Daniel Leal/AFP via Getty Images

    Describing his private conversations with Sunak as “fruitful,” Zelenskyy said he was “very grateful” that Britain had finally heard Kyiv’s call for longer-range missiles.

    But he warned that without fighter jets, there is a risk of “stagnation” in his country’s battle against Russian occupation.

    “Without the weapons that we are discussing now, and the weapons that we just discussed with Rishi earlier today, and how Britain is going to help us, you know, all of this is very important,” he said. “Without this, there would be stagnation, which will not bring anything good.”

    Rolling out the red carpet

    The U.K. had rolled out the red carpet for Zelenskyy’s surprise day-long visit, which alongside the visit to the military base included talks with Sunak at Downing Street, a meeting with King Charles at Buckingham Palace and a historic address to the U.K. parliament in Westminster.

    Only a handful of leaders have made such an address in Westminster Hall over the past 30 years, including Nelson Mandela and Barack Obama.

    “We have freedom. Give us wings to protect it,” Zelenskyy told British lawmakers, after symbolically handing House of Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle a helmet used by one of Ukraine’s fighter pilots. The message written upon it stated: “Combat aircraft for Ukraine, wings for freedom.”

    Zelenskyy’s call was backed by former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who urged Sunak to meet his request.

    “We have more than 100 Typhoon jets. We have more than 100 Challenger 2 tanks,” he said. “The best single use for any of these items is to deploy them now for the protection of the Ukrainians — not least because that is how we guarantee our own long-term security.”

    Western defense ministers will gather to discuss further military aid to Ukraine on February 14, at a meeting at the U.S. base of Ramstein in southwest Germany.

    Sunak’s spokesman said that while Britain has made no decision on whether to send its own jets, “there is an ongoing discussion among other countries about their own fighter jets, some of which are more akin to what Ukrainian pilots are used to.”

    Training day

    Britain’s announcement marks the first public declaration by a European country on the training of Ukrainian pilots, and could spur other European nations into following suit. France is already considering a similar request from Kyiv.

    Yuriyy Sak, an adviser to Ukrainian Minister of Defence Oleksii Reznikov, praised the U.K.’s decision and said allies “know very well that in order to defeat Russia in 2023, Ukraine needs all types of weaponry,” short of nuclear.

    “A few weeks ago, the U.K. showed leadership in the issue of providing tanks to Ukraine, and then other allies have followed their example,” he said. “Now the U.K. is again showing leadership in the pilot training issue. Hopefully other countries will follow.”

    The British scheme is likely to run in parallel to an American program to train Ukrainian pilots to fly U.S. fighters, for which the U.S. House of Representatives approved $100 million last summer. In October Ukraine announced a group of several dozen pilots had been selected for training on Western fighter jets.

    The first Ukrainian pilots are expected to arrive in Britain in the spring, with Downing Street warning the instruction program could last up to five years. Military analysts, however, say the length of any such scheme could vary significantly depending on the pilots’ previous expertise and the type of fighter they learn to operate.

    The U.K. announcement is therefore of “significant value” but “does not suggest the provision of fighter jets is imminent,” said Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow for airpower at the British think tank RUSI.

    The British program is likely to involve simulators and focus on providing training on NATO tactics and basic cockpit procedures to Ukrainian pilots who already have expertise in flying Soviet-era jets, Bronk said.

    The new training programs come in addition to the expansion in the numbers of Ukrainian early recruits being trained on basic tactics in the U.K., from 10,000 to 20,000 soldiers this year.

    ‘Unimaginable hardships’

    Wednesday’s visit marked Zelenskyy’s first trip to the U.K. since Russia’s invasion almost a year ago and only his second confirmed journey outside Ukraine during the war, following a visit to the United States last December.

    The Ukrainian president arrived on a Royal Air Force plane at an airport north of London Wednesday morning, the entire trip a closely guarded secret until he landed.

    Recounting his first visit to London back in 2020, when he sat in British wartime leader Winston Churchill’s armchair, Zelenskyy said: “I certainly felt something — but it is only now that I know what the feeling was. It is a feeling of how bravery takes you through the most unimaginable hardships to finally reward you with victory.”

    Zelenskyy travelled to Paris Wednesday evening for talks with French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. In a short statement, Zelenskyy said France and Germany “can be game-changers,” adding: “The earlier we get heavy weapons, long-range missiles, aircraft, alongside tanks, the sooner the war will end.”

    Macron said Ukraine “can count on France and Europe to [help] win the war,” while Scholz added that Zelenskyy expected attendance at a summit of EU leaders in Brussels Thursday “is a sign of solidarity.”

    Dan Bloom and Clea Caulcutt provided additional reporting.



    [ad_2]
    #train #Ukrainian #pilots #step #sending #fighter #jets
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • China to EU: Drop calls for Ukraine’s ‘complete victory’

    China to EU: Drop calls for Ukraine’s ‘complete victory’

    [ad_1]

    china nuclear weapons 80108

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    Beijing’s top envoy to the EU on Wednesday questioned the West’s call to help Ukraine achieve “complete victory,” on the eve of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s possible arrival in Brussels.

    Fu Cong, the Chinese ambassador to the EU, also criticized the bloc for “erosion” of its commitment on Taiwan, warning “senior officials from the EU institutions” to stop visiting the self-ruled island.

    Fu’s provocative comments on Ukraine and Taiwan, two of the most sensitive geopolitical controversies between China and the West, come as Chinese President Xi Jinping is planning a trip to Moscow, according to the Russian government.

    Insisting that the Russia-Ukraine “conflict” was merely an “unavoidable” talking point, Fu said Beijing otherwise enjoys a multifaceted “traditional friendship” with Moscow.

    “Frankly speaking, we are quite concerned about the possible escalation of this conflict,” Fu said at an event hosted by the European Policy Centre in Brussels. “And we don’t believe that only providing weapons will actually solve the problem.”

    “We are quite concerned about people talking about winning a complete victory on the battlefield. We believe that the right place would be at the negotiating table,” Fu added.

    His remarks come on the same day as Zelenskyy visits London, his first trip to Western Europe since Russia launched its full-scale invasion almost a year ago. POLITICO reported that Zelenskyy — who according to his aides has never had his calls picked up by Xi, while the Chinese leader has instead met or called Putin on multiple occasions over the past year — was also planning a visit to Brussels on Thursday, before bungled EU communications threw the trip into doubt.

    The idea of a “complete victory” for Ukraine has been most vocally supported by Baltic and Eastern European countries. French President Emmanuel Macron has vowed support for “victory” for Ukraine.

    But toeing Xi’s line, Fu said the “security concerns of both sides” — Ukraine as well as Russia — should be taken care of.

    Fu also dismissed the comparison between Ukraine and Taiwan, both of which face military threats from a nuclear-armed neighbor.

    “I must state up front that [the] Ukrainian crisis and the Taiwan issue are two completely different things. Ukraine is an independent state, and Taiwan is part of China,” he said. “So there’s no comparability between the two issues.”

    He went on to criticize the EU’s handling of the Taiwan issue.

    “Nowadays, what we’re seeing is that there is some erosion of these basic commitments. We see that the parliamentarians and also senior officials from the EU institutions are also visiting Taiwan,” he said.

    The European Commission has not publicized any details of its officials’ visit to Taiwan. The European External Action Service, the EU’s diplomatic arm, has not replied to a request for comment.

    If the EU signed an investment treaty with Taiwan, Fu said this would “fundamentally change … or shake the foundation” of EU-China relations. “It is that serious.”



    [ad_2]
    #China #Drop #calls #Ukraines #complete #victory
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • As Kyiv steels for offensive, Russia launches missile raids and builds up troops near Kupyansk

    As Kyiv steels for offensive, Russia launches missile raids and builds up troops near Kupyansk

    [ad_1]

    russia ukraine war 61293

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    KYIV — Russia has launched extensive missile raids across Ukraine and is building up troops near the northeastern city of Kupyansk to test Ukrainian defenses, just as Kyiv is warning that Moscow is gearing up to launch a new offensive.

    Valeriy Zaluzhnyy, commander in chief of Ukraine’s army, said in a statement that two Kalibr cruise missiles entered the airspace of Moldova and NATO member Romania, before veering into Ukrainian territory. Romania, however, cautioned that radar only detected a missile launched from a Russian ship in the Black Sea traveling close to its airspace — some 35 kilometers away — but not inside its territory.

    “At approximately 10:33 a.m., these missiles crossed Romanian airspace. After that, they again entered the airspace of Ukraine at the crossing point of the borders of the three states. The missiles were launched from the Black Sea,” Zaluzhnyy said. 

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy added, “Several Russian missiles flew through the airspace of Moldova and Romania. Today’s missiles are a challenge to NATO, collective security. This is terror that can and must be stopped. Stopped by the world.”

    Governors in Kharkiv, Ivano-Frankivsk, Lviv and Khmelnytskyi reported power cuts due to the barrage.  

    The attack started before dawn in the eastern region of Kharkiv, according to the governor, Oleg Synegubov. 

    “Today, at 4:00 a.m., about 12 rockets hit critical infrastructure facilities in Kharkiv and the region. Currently, emergency and stabilizing light shutdowns are being employed. About 150,000 people in Kharkiv remain without electricity,” Synegubov said. 

    Synegubov said the barrage came the same morning as Russian invasion forces increased their attacks near Kupyansk, a city in the Kharkiv region that Ukrainian forces liberated last fall. “The enemy has increased its presence on the front line and is testing our defense lines for weak points. Our defenders reliably hold their positions and are ready for any possible actions of the enemy,” Synegubov said in a statement.

    He also reported that about eight people were injured in one of the latest Russian missiles strikes in Kharkiv. Two of the victims are in critical condition. 

    Meanwhile, in the west of the country, Ukrainian air defense units are firing back at multiple cruise missile attacks. “That is Russian revenge for the fact that the whole world supports us,” Khmelnitskyi Governor Serhiy Hamaliy said in a statement. He also reported a missile strike in the city, saying that part of Khmelnitsky was without power. 

    Ukrainian Air Force Command reported the destruction of five cruise missiles and five of seven Iranian Shahed kamikaze drones Russia launched from the coast of the Sea of Azov.  The Russians also launched six Kalibr sea-based cruise missiles from a Russian frigate in the Black Sea.

    The Ukrainian Air Force added that air defense units shot down 61 of 71 cruise missiles that Russia launched.

    “The occupiers also launched a massive attack with S-300 anti-aircraft missiles from the districts of Belgorod (Russia) and Tokmak (occupied territory of the Zaporizhzhia region),” the air force said in a statement. “Up to 35 anti-aircraft guided missiles (S-300) were launched in the Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia regions, which cannot be destroyed in the air by means of air defense. Around 8:30 a.m. cruise missiles were launched from Tu-95 MS strategic bombers.”

    This article has been updated.



    [ad_2]
    #Kyiv #steels #offensive #Russia #launches #missile #raids #builds #troops #Kupyansk
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )